NotKen2024

@LukidDreamer @CatSE___ApeX___ No, that would be totally unrelated. (Having years of wireless and fiber deployment experience)

@CatSE___ApeX___ Hey Catse, so Telus just let go a bunch of companies in Edmonton who install fibre lines, do you think this has anything to do with ASTS. Could ASTS possibly provide connections to home hubs as well?

Tucked into the footnotes and market analysis of this May 14 order are explicit references to major satellite direct-to-device approvals that the FCC handed down just two days prior (on May 12, 2026). $ASTS

@LuckyStuey @LeoCapital_01 @Gwynne_Shotwell @SpaceX These are not landline networks where you use an LCR algorithm and pick the cheapest option for an entire session. These are dynamic mobility networks where they will default to the most integrated solution and then, MAYBE, consider other options in some scenarios.

@LeoCapital_01 @Gwynne_Shotwell @SpaceX They're not going to pick anyone. They're going to let any of them provide service via their networks. Their LCR algorithms will "pick" whichever NTN is most economical, which is likely to be Starlink V2 DTC (S-Band MSS) in most cases.

The carrier JV is triggering a lot of debate. SpaceX President @Gwynne_Shotwell called it "David and Goliath (X3)." @SpaceX fans are saying DOJ will block it as anticompetitive. Let me cut through the noise. SpaceX is a $2 trillion company calling itself David. The three carriers combined are worth $600B. The JV press release explicitly says it will "expand access" and enable "more satellite service providers to compete, invest, and grow." That's the opposite of anticompetitive. SpaceX doesn't need these carriers. They just bought 65 MHz of their own spectrum. The carriers can't block @SpaceX from doing anything. Here's what I expect in coming days: SpaceX fans will flood every $ASTS post with "DOJ will kill this" and "collusion." Elon will likely tweet about it. The X debate gets tribal and loud. Ignore the noise. This month, more JV details will emerge -- which spectrum, which satellite partners, what timeline. $ASTS likely named explicitly as a technology partner. SpaceX public S-1 drops and includes their D2D strategy. The competitive picture gets clearer. What matters: All three carrier CEOs have publicly said they won't do an MVNO with SpaceX. T-Mobile's CFO called SpaceX D2C "low usage, geographically contained." The carriers want an independent partner. That's $ASTS . My suggestion: Don't get pulled into tribal @SpaceX vs $ASTS arguments. The thesis hasn't changed. Two business models. Two TAMs. @SpaceX owns direct-to-consumer. The carrier JV goes through $ASTS . Both markets are massive. Stay focused on the catalysts: BB8-10 launch mid-June, Russell inclusion May 22, SpaceX IPO repricing the sector, and now a carrier JV forming around $ASTS technology. Let X argue. We watch the fundamentals. $ASTS 🛰️

@LuckyStuey @LeoCapital_01 @Gwynne_Shotwell @SpaceX 😂

@LeoCapital_01 @Gwynne_Shotwell @SpaceX Pure delusion - the whole point of the JV is not to pick any NTN partners and be open to all of them. Clueless.

@GuywithUmbrella @DaMadMonk_ @spacanpanman Costs to operate a tower includes rent, power, telco, technicians, generators, maintenance (access roads, theft, wear and tear, etc.). Total is often >$100k/yr. Then add capital cost to upgrade every few yrs. Another >$100k/yr. Adds up fast. Only justifiable w/lots of traffic.

@NotKen2024 @DaMadMonk_ @spacanpanman When you say billions, what makes it cost THAT much for MNOs to keep operating with towers?

$ASTS: 🚨This is a huge regulatory development as it appears the FCC may now accept a functional-equivalence model for spectrum buildout requirement = satellite coverage instead of terrestrial tower coverage. This potentially unlocks a massive amount of CapEx and operating savings for MNOs, like AT&T and Verizon, that are partnered with AST SpaceMobile. Why? If a satellite service, like AST SpaceMobile's, can deliver real mobile broadband directly to phones, then the FCC can rationally say that the public-interest goal is not terrestrial towers per se; the goal is service. This is especially compelling for rural, remote, maritime, disaster-response and lower-density areas where terrestrial tower economics are poor.

@donwinslow Wrong

Dear #GeorgeClooney Make no mistake and let there be no doubt YOU helped elect Donald Trump. imo. So this silly shit your spewing now MEANS NOTHING. You helped build the monster and helped to cripple the best alternative at that moment in history. YOU.

@LuckyStuey How is their “Tower Co” model any different than ASTS’s solution which works with multiple carriers in the same market on the same satellite?

$RKLB $VSAT Based on the technical configuration in the image and recent industry developments as of March 2026, this design strongly resembles the Rocket Lab "Lightning" or "Photon" bus platforms. Here is the breakdown of why this matches current market data: 1. The Rocket Lab Connection Recent reports (from late March 2026) indicate that Rocket Lab has emerged as a frontrunner to provide the bus platform for the 2,800-satellite Equatys constellation. The image shows a small-to-medium form factor satellite with a single, large deployed solar array and a flat-panel antenna body—a signature of the "Lightning" bus designed for high-cadence, low-cost LEO manufacturing. 2. Technical Alignments • Form Factor: The "flat pack" style shown in the graphic is optimized for stacking multiple units in a single launch vehicle (like Electron or Neutron), which is essential for a 2,800-satellite roll-out. • D2D Payload: The large rectangular surface area on the nadir (Earth-facing) side of the satellite bus is typical for the phased-array antennas required for Direct-to-Device (D2D) connectivity (3GPP/5G standards), similar to the tech used by Starlink or AST SpaceMobile but scaled for the Space42/Viasat partnership. • Convergence Architecture: The text "NTN TN Convergence" refers to Non-Terrestrial Networks. This specific bus is designed to operate as a "Space Tower," allowing multiple mobile operators to share the same hardware. 3. Comparison with Other Platforms While there are other providers in the public domain, the image deviates from them in key ways: • vs. SpaceX (Starlink): Starlink buses are much thinner "sheets." The image shows a thicker, more traditional integrated bus. • vs. York Space Systems: York's S-Class buses typically have a different solar wing configuration. • vs. Terran Orbital: While they do similar D2D work (e.g., for Rivada), the specific solar-to-body ratio in this Space42 render is a closer match to Rocket Lab's recent "Lightning" prototypes shown at Satellite 2026. Key Observation for Investors: If you are tracking this for your portfolio, keep an eye on the "strategic investor" announcement expected before summer 2026. The shift toward a "TowerCo" model (infrastructure sharing) is the real disruptor here, as it significantly lowers the CapEx for the partners compared to a proprietary fleet. Since you've been following Rocket Lab (RKLB) and Viasat (VSAT) closely, this convergence of their technology suggests a very tight manufacturing and launch integration for the 2028–2029 operational window.

@spacanpanman What he didn’t talk about was the impact to their rural tower business. Having spent a couple decades building out wireless networks, I’m highly confident that the carriers will decommission a ton of rural cell sites once space mobile is fully up and running.

$ASTS: American Tower CEO Steve Vondran responded to a question about satellite's impact on their business (Q4 earnings call) "When it comes to satellites, the reason that we made an investment in AST SpaceMobile was to get a board seat, so that we would have a front row seat to this technology as it unfolds. And we certainly continue to monitor that. We talked to the engineers in the space. We talked to the dreamers in the space and what they're trying to do. And that gives us a lot of confidence that satellites will be complementary to the terrestrial networks. 6G is likely to be designed with satellites being an integral part of an integrated network. But the simple physics of spectrum, the simple economics of having a constellation that has to consistently be replenished over time means that towers will always be the cheapest and best way of deploying the level of content, the volume of mobile data that consumers demand. So while we think the satellite business is a great business, it's going to be a good complement to the networks. And we certainly are excited about the developments we're seeing in that area. We've seen no risk at all to the tower business over the long-term, because again, towers will always be a cheaper form of delivering a mass amount of data to the consumer. And the satellites just can't compete with that." CFO Rod Smith of American Tower also chimes in: "And most recently, and we announced it in the prepared remarks and in the press release, we sold half of our stake in AST Mobile. I remember it was just a modest investment. We really invested in it to stay close to the satellite business and to learn about that business going forward. There's no secret, the stock has done well, the company has done well. And we looked at it as a good opportunity to recycle some of that capital. So we sold half the stake, we used that to actually buy back shares in the last quarter. And we maintained a board seat on AST. So we still have the ability to continue to learn."

@kingtutcap Blocked him a while ago too.

I try my best not to get involved in politics on this app because it’s become so tense that it’s nearly impossible to have any rational thought or discussion on both sides (left and right) but I’ve officially had enough of this Endless Clown. This is an unhinged, deranged individual who has added little to no value to the $ASTS community and instead has consistently offered dumb takes since he “invested” last year. From nonstop whining and attacking management because the stock was down and his options were going to zero, to screaming “fraud” and threatening the SEC every dip, to throwing out absurd price targets and comparing the company to GameStop, to cussing and insulting others every single day. The list just keeps going… Now he’s dragging the company ticker into highly political nonsense that has absolutely nothing to do with the business, the tech, or the long-term thesis. Completely unnecessary attention-seeking behavior and only makes the community look worse. I’m genuinely embarrassed to have the 🅰️ in my name knowing I’m even loosely associated with him. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, not everyone who talks about the stock is worth following. As the company and community grow, more airhead individuals will show up and many will blindly follow them. I’ve blocked this clown, and if you respectfully disagree with the above, feel free to unfollow or block me too…